Page 336 - Week 02 - Tuesday, 1 March 1994
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
SUPREME COURT (AMENDMENT) BILL (NO. 3) 1993
[COGNATE BILLS:
MAGISTRATES COURT (AMENDMENT) BILL (NO. 3) 1993
MAGISTRATES COURT (CIVIL JURISIDICTION) (AMENDMENT) BILL 1993
SMALL CLAIMS (AMENDMENT) BILL 1993
CORONERS (AMENDMENT) BILL 1993
ADMINISTRATIVE APPEALS TRIBUNAL (AMENDMENT) BILL 1993]
Debate resumed from 9 December 1993, on motion by Mr Connolly:
That this Bill be agreed to in principle.
MR DEPUTY SPEAKER: Is it the wish of the Assembly to debate this order of the day concurrently with the Magistrates Court (Amendment) Bill (No. 3) 1993, the Magistrates Court (Civil Jurisdiction) (Amendment) Bill 1993, the Small Claims (Amendment) Bill 1993, the Coroners (Amendment) Bill 1993 and the Administrative Appeals Tribunal (Amendment) Bill 1993? There being no objection, that course will be followed. I remind members that in debating order of the day No. 1 they may also address their remarks to orders of the day No. 2, No. 3, No. 4, No. 5 and No. 6.
MR HUMPHRIES (8.02): Mr Deputy Speaker, the Bills before us tonight are part of a package which provides for the establishment of a new basis for fees and charges being levied in the Supreme Court, the Magistrates Court, the Coroner's Court and the AAT in this Territory. Perhaps the genesis of these Bills was a decision made subsequent to the putting of a motion in this Assembly by the Liberal Party to disallow some Supreme Court charges last year. I think at the time the Government felt that there needed to be a review of the whole basis on which fees and charges were levied in the ACT. That was a sensible decision, and the result of that initiative was that we have these Bills before us tonight. I must say that because of that genesis of these Bills there has been considerable consultation between members of the Opposition and the Government and the Independents about these Bills and also, I understand, the representatives of the Law Society. As a result, I think we have before us a package of Bills which are eminently supportable and which will pass tonight.
The narrow base for determining fees and charges under existing legislation will be replaced under this package of Bills by a broad base of power for setting fees similar to one another. In other words, the same basis will be used in all of these courts at the one time. The other significant element of this legislative package is that the legislation will contain within its terms a fairly comprehensive list of the exemptions which are applicable for those who seek to have the fees of the court and the charges of the court waived in their favour.
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .